Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Rs.

1993-94 1,39,087 1994-95 12,46,828 1995-96 10,72,091 1996-97 56,736 In ground No. 4 the assessed has objected the addition of Rs. 1,36,41,971 made as unexplained cash credits. In ground No. 5 the assessed objected the following additions on account of jewellery as unexplained :

Rs.

1993-94 54,781 1994-95 5,396 1995-96 30,174 1997-98 2,48,602 In the sixth ground, the assessed has objected the addition of Rs. 1,15,000 on account various valuables as undisclosed. In last, the assessed has appealed for telescoping of the income earned in a particular year and the same should be telescoped in regard to another year's income.

15. Next addition is on account of jewellery found during the course of search. The assessing officer was not satisfied with the explanation that all the jewellery found during the course of search is from disclosed sources. Accordingly, he made addition on account of unexplained jewellery. The same submissions were repeated here before us also. Alternative, it was stated that assessed has surrendered a sum of Rs. 24 lakhs during last three years. Therefore, benefit of telescoping should be given, as the amount was available with the assessed for making investment in the jewellery. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative placed reliance on the orders of the assessing officer.

16. Next addition is of Rs. 1,15,000 on account of various valuables. This addition was made on similar circumstances as in regard to jewellery. The similar arguments were put forward by the learned counsel and the learned Departmental Representative.

17. Last ground is in regard to telescoping of the additions against the amount already surrendered by the assessed, which was available with the assessed for making investment, etc. The learned counsel submitted that telescoping has to be allowed, as this is a set principle of law. Lastly, it was argued that income should be assessed on a real income, as the premises of the assessed was searched and no assets other than declared, were found. Therefore, real income theory should be adopted and on this proposition, the reliance was placed on the cases which are already stated by the counsel and referred above.

61. The last argument was in regard to telescoping. We have already deleted the main additions and restored the two additions which were on account of jewellery and valuables, therefore, there is no need to give any finding on account of telescoping.

62. In the result, the appeal of the assessed is partly allowed.

R.S. Syal, A.M. 21-7-2002 I have considered the order of my learned brother, meticulously. In spite of my best persuasion, I fail to fall in line with the observations and conclusions of my learned brother in respect of ground Nos. 2, 3 and 5. 1, therefore, record my dissent as under :